Dear Sundari,
I heard your teachings and find them very efficient for me, especially the suggestion to create a “Truth Vasana”…
I have a long-time confusion about “who am I”. When I ask this question, there is a sense of knowing or intuiting that I am limitless Consciousness, but how can I be certain that this is Truth and I’m not fooling myself?
Sundari: Vedanta is the only independent means of knowledge capable of removing ignorance of your true nature, assuming qualifications and proper teaching. The scripture (Vedanta) and the words of enlightened people say your true nature is non-dual, ever-present unchanging Consciousness, and provide the indisputable logic to support this. If you have faith in the scripture (shreddha) that should be enough to confirm your sense of knowing or intuition. Faith is one of the most important qualifications for Self-knowledge to take place in the mind and the starting point for self inquiry.
What we all want is freedom from limitation and suffering, which is moksa. The essence of moksa is the ability to discriminate what is real (that which is always present and unchanging, i.e., Consciousness or satya) from what is apparently real (that which is not always present and always changing, i.e., all objects or mithya). An object is anything known to you, whether subtle like a feeling or gross like your body. For this, qualifications are crucial. Without them, Self-knowledge will not stick in the mind simply because it will be turned towards the world, looking for what is wants (freedom) where it cannot be found.
If you have discrimination (viveka), you will have dispassion (viragya), which is indifference to the results of your actions based on Self-knowledge. The platform from which we discriminate is not ego determined, however. An individual can set up his or her own parameters and think critically within those parameters. Even ‘logic’ within mithya cannot be trusted for three reasons: 1.) worldly knowledge is ego or subject-based, therefore there is always a personal filter involved; 2. there is always something unknown; 3.) it may not be true in all states (awake, dreaming, deep sleep) or all phases of time (past, present , future)
Whereas, for moksha, Self-knowledge is what you use to think critically, and it is totally impersonal because it is object oriented, the object being moksha. It is not oriented in the subject or the ego. Knowledge is not knowledge unless it is true to the object. If it is “my” knowledge, then it is my interpretation of an object, which is not necessarily knowledge. Ignorance (or my point of view) causes me to see or experience objects as though they are actually there. People believe that ignorance is knowledge because they believe that what they experience is knowledge. It may be knowledge, but it may not be. Furthermore, Self-knowledge can be totally trusted as it is always true in all states or phases of time because it is true to the Self – meaning it cannot be dismissed or negated by any other knowledge.
Moksha by its very nature means freedom from the individual, not freedom for the individual. Perhaps the biggest erroneous notion is the belief that the individual is going to get this wonderful thing called freedom. But it is not like that. By identifying with yourself as an person – setting yourself up as the authority as an individual or ego – you accept dependence on samsara, Maya. Moksha is the knowledge I am Consciousness and not the individual I have been lead to believe I am. Consciousness is the only ‘thing’ free of samsara.
Once you know who you are, you cannot argue with or defend the position of the ignorant any longer. Before Self-knowledge is firm, one has to take a stand in Consciousness as Consciousness, which requires negating all thoughts to the contrary with great dedication and diligence. Once Self-knowledge is firm, knowledge like ignorance, are objects known to you and you are free of both. Nothing is hidden, nothing is unknown, nothing is beyond understanding because it is all you and arises from you, Consciousness. You are the essence of everything and that upon which the essence of everything depends. You are free of bondage to objects and so are free to enjoy objects for what they are, without expecting them to deliver something that they are incapable of delivering – happiness. You are already happy. Nothing adds to or takes this happiness away.
If you understand that the subject matter of Self-knowledge or Vedanta is you, then you would know that Vedanta is the very foundation of life itself. And life is dependent on you, not the other way around. Self-knowledge is the knowledge that underpins all knowledge; it is the irrefutable logic of your own unexamined experience. Unless you dump everything you think you know and ignore what everyone else thinks they know (unless they know that their true nature is unlimited Consciousness) you will be an ego trying to experience Consciousness, instead of realizing that you are Consciousness apparently experiencing an ego.
Ignorance only ends for the jiva or the Self under the spell of ignorance, when Self-knowledge removes it. Critical thinking is good in that one needs to question everything. In fact the ability to doubt and reason (manas) is built into the nature of the mind for the very simple reason that reality is not what it appears to be. Doubting is essential and it is a function given to us by Isvara, by Consciousness, when maya is operating so that the spell of ignorance can be broken. But unless the critical mind is guided in its thinking, it is not able to free itself. Ignorance is hard wired, too powerful and too seductive.
Fran: I mean, how can I be sure that whatever I recognize is not drishya?
Sundari: Whatever you recognize is drishya, what is seen, how can it be otherwise? The question is – who is seeing what? Who does the ‘I’ refer to in your statement above? You, Consciousness, are the one that sees in that seeing cannot take place without you. Through Self-knowledge you ‘see’ yourself as Consciousness because there is only Consciousness. The non-experiencing witness is the non-dual Self, but it functions in two ways, as the opaque witness or jiva (saguna brahman – with qualities) and the transparent witness (without qualities – nirguna brahman).
The opaque witness is the mind/ego watching itself, and the transparent witness is the Self, pure Consciousness. The Self is a seer that never began or ceases and is the all-seeing eye or “I” that sees only itself because there are no objects for it to see. It is self-effulgent as there is nothing but itself. Eventually, we must drop all these terms, even nirguna brahman because that implies saguna. It would be more appropriate to say that the Self, seeing only itself, is that which knows the seer with reference to the seen, only when Maya is operating. The Self-aware Self appears as a seer; but it never actually is a seer, unless seeing refers to its own Self.
Whereas, when ignorance is operating the jiva thinks that the seer is different from the seen, the subject and object are different. Isvara is also known as saguna brahman because it operates Maya (the gunas), but unlike the jiva, it is never deluded by them. When tamas and rajas arise in saguna brahman, then Consciousness apparently becomes a jiva and is deluded by Maya.
Fran: How can I recognize something without qualities? It seems that I can only understand who I am by inference – by negating everything, so I am that which is left after negation.
Sundari: This is correct because inference is a valid means of knowledge. Once you negate everything, look and see if what is left has qualities. Consciousness is just you. Fran is a name for you. You see qualities and no qualities. Both are just ideas appearing in you, made out of your thoughts. You are the Consciousness of both.
Fran: Another problem is that negation seems not so honest to me, because it is not totally true that I am not body-mind. Neti Neti creates duality…I am not only the body-mind for sure, but it is the Self (atma) as existence (sat). It’s extremely confusing for me, for my logic, that I am aware (chit) of an object which is also me (sat). Though, I do have a sense that existence is one, and not dual…I guess the essence of my question is: how to be sure that this is reality and not imagination.
Sundari: The subject/object split is only a belief, based on a false perception of objects. The way you can be sure is to accept the words of the scripture. It is the testimony of hundreds of thousands of enlightened people. Or contemplate on the teaching in this satsang. It is called the location of objects teaching. Yes, you and what you are aware of is just Consciousness. Again, ask yourself who is asking this question? Duality is super-imposed onto non-duality when maya is operating. Ignorance is so hypnotic that from the jiva’s point of view, it is almost impossible to negate duality without the help of the scripture and a qualified teacher. Having the scripture unfolded by a qualified teacher is essential for self inquiry so that you can see the logic of your own experience. Reading and listening to a satsang is not enough. You have to examine your own experience using the teachings of Vedanta to guide you.
Here is the location of objects inquiry:
You exist. You exist as Consciousness. You experience everything “in” Consciousness, nothing “outside” of Consciousness (there is no such thing as “inside or outside” Consciousness, but we have to use these terms though it is best to say within the scope of Consciousness). The physical objects you experience are the thoughts of the objects as they appear in Consciousness. See if this isn’t true. The feelings that you have are just Consciousness appearing as feelings. The thoughts you have are just Consciousness appearing as thoughts. So you and what you see are non-different; you and what you think are non-different. Maya is a power in Consciousness that makes it look like the seer, you, and what you see, are separate. It is tricking you. See if you can find an object that is not made out your thoughts.
Then see if your thoughts are made out of anything other than you, Consciousness. Everything you experience is coming out of you. Can you find any other place where you are experiencing things except in you?
The neti neti teaching is a trick, but a necessary trick. All the objects are you because reality is non-dual. But the objects have a dependent existence on you. Consciousness exists regardless of the presence or absence of objects. Take the ocean and the wave: both have a dependent existence on water, but water is free of the ocean and the wave. If you don’t know what non-duality means i.e. you do not know you are Consciousness, you will think that you are Fran, a person seeking moksha. If you are a person seeking moksha you will be attached to certain objects including the idea that you are seeking moksha. So you need to break your attachment by understanding that the objects exist within the scope of Consciousness (you) but are not you.
It is not obvious that they are not you when you are ignorant of your nature as Consciousness because you need them to make you feel secure or to validate your identity. So you have to free your mind of them. As stated previously, Vedanta says that Self-knowledge is always good because it is that which you cannot negate. In other words, it is always true and always present. Once you have negated all the objects, then you can investigate Consciousness, which is left over because you cannot negate Consciousness. When you have understood what Consciousness is it becomes clear that the objects are also Consciousness. Concentrate on the location of objects teaching in this email and your confusion about the ‘not self’ will go away.
Fran: Another thing which is unclear to me these days is why call Atma Consciousness. To say that I am Consciousness is to give an attribute to something which is supposed to be without any attributes. If it is conscious, it can be unconscious as well. Conscious and unconscious are only dualistic terms created by the mind. I don’t know how to call it, but Consciousness/Consciousness seems confusing to me, something mixed with name and form (nama rupa). In deep sleep, for example, I’m not conscious, at least not in the regular way the word conscious is used.
Sundari: Good thinking; strictly speaking it is not correct to refer to Atma as Conscious or Consciousness. We are restrained by the use of words, but we use them advisedly, with reference to Self-knowledge. There is only one Atma, one Self. It is you. You have to be conscious to observe your doubts and to write these words. Look and see if you can find an origin for you. You will not be able to find a beginning to you. Consciousness is not an attribute. It is the knower of attributes. It has no form so it has no attributes. It is just the knowing principle. It can know anything because it knows everything. It cannot do this if it is an attribute of something else.
Consciousness can only do this because it is free of all attributes. Attributes limit things and attributes are not conscious. They do not know anything. They are objects (ideas) appearing in you, Consciousness. Consciousness appears to be unconscious because Maya makes it seem to be unconscious. But to be unconscious you need to be conscious or you will be dead. In deep sleep you are conscious but not Fran. Fran is unconscious in that state but you are that which makes it possible for Fran to be unconscious there and to be conscious when the waking state happens in you, Consciousness.
It is correct to say that conscious and unconscious are dualistic terms but how are they known? They are known by you, Consciousness. So Consciousness is the knower of what is conscious and what is unconscious. At the same time Consciousness is conscious of itself whether or not objects are present. There are only two categories in existence, you and what you see/experience. If you can see something it is not you. You see your thoughts. In fact, all you actually see is thoughts. So they cannot be you. Now look at the one that sees the thoughts. When you understand that one you will see that the objects are you also.
Fran: If you can help me understand who I am, I will be endlessly grateful. I’m quite stuck with it (though I see more clearly the opposite – that the ego is inert, so the “me” is only apparently real.
Sundari: Yes, the ego is just a thought. It is not alive. It is not conscious. It is inert subtle matter. I have just posted a satsang on this topic, called Knowledge as Opposed to Experiential Ego Negation, please read it.
Fran: I also think that my confusion is a result of listening to inaccurate teachers, borrowing false understandings.
Sundari: If you are serious about moksa and self-inquiry, you should stick with Vedanta. It is not advisable to read or study or listen to anyone who is not a teacher of traditional Vedanta because you will get confused. All other teachings, even though some contain aspects of non-duality, tend to be mixed with ignorance and knowledge. If you do not know the difference between the two, you will get confused. Yes, there are apparent contradictions in Vedanta scripture but the teacher can resolve them for you. In this case, as I said above, I suggest that you only think about the location of objects teaching until you understand. It will kill your doubts. It is necessary to know what ignorance is before one can remove it. Vedanta is just the most efficient way to understanding this fact, and most importantly, of translating this teaching into the life of the jiva. This is because it is a complete teaching and not dependent on the teacher.
There is an idea that if it is all one, then one teaching is as good as the other, but this is not true because one way is not as good as the other. Some ways are better than others and there is always a ‘best’ way, assuming qualifications. By ‘best’ I mean a method that is independent of anyone and does what it purports to do in a timely fashion. This is why you can trust Vedanta.
Namaste,
Sundari
